Re: Torture test for Nautilus
- From: Federico Mena Quintero <federico ximian com>
- To: Alexander Larsson <alexl redhat com>
- Cc: nautilus-list gnome org
- Subject: Re: Torture test for Nautilus
- Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 17:48:02 -0500
On Wed, 2006-10-18 at 18:10 +0200, Alexander Larsson wrote:
> How long did you have to run it to get a failure? I ran if for a while
> and didn't see anything (HEAD). I'll start a longer run now to test.
[Hmm, I'm using Nautilus from GNOME 2.12.]
It ran for about 10 seconds, then got really slow (in the monitor code),
then crashed about 30 seconds afterwards when it got out of the
> I made some performance fixes to gnome-vfs-monitor.c to make this less
> total ass performance-wise, but the fact is that you're running an
> application that creates file notification events as quickly as the cpu
> can generate them. We can't really do anything but spend 100% of the
> time handling incoming events.
Yeah, good point. It didn't have trouble when I inserted a very small
usleep() between each operation. I agree that "instant changes" is not
a case we should contemplate performance-wise.
> > The torture program supports a "--seed" option that you can use to seed
> > the random number generator. This is so that the sequence of "random"
> > torture steps will be reproducible.
> However, it doesn't print the seed used on startup, so you don't know
> what seed to use the second time.
Good point! :)
Should I commit the script to nautilus/test/? Then we can add this kind
of stuff easily.
Thanks for taking a look; I hope this is useful to find some weird
] [Thread Prev